Viacom Files Federal Copyright Infringement Complaint Against YouTube and Google Tuesday March 13, 9:02 am ET Suit Seeks Court Ruling to Require YouTube and Google to Comply With Copyright Laws and Pay $1 Billion in Damages NEW YORK, March 13 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Viacom Inc. (NYSE: VIA - News and VIA.B - News) today announced that it has sued YouTube and Google in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for massive intentional copyright infringement of Viacom's entertainment properties. The suit seeks more than $1 billion in damages, as well as an injunction prohibiting Google and YouTube from further copyright infringement. The complaint contends that almost 160,000 unauthorized clips of Viacom's programming have been available on YouTube and that these clips had been viewed more than 1.5 billion times. In connection with the filing, Viacom released the following statement: "YouTube is a significant, for-profit organization that has built a lucrative business out of exploiting the devotion of fans to others' creative works in order to enrich itself and its corporate parent Google. Their business model, which is based on building traffic and selling advertising off of unlicensed content, is clearly illegal and is in obvious conflict with copyright laws. In fact, YouTube's strategy has been to avoid taking proactive steps to curtail the infringement on its site, thus generating significant traffic and revenues for itself while shifting the entire burden - and high cost - of monitoring YouTube onto the victims of its infringement. This behavior stands in stark contrast to the actions of other significant distributors, who have recognized the fair value of entertainment content and have concluded agreements to make content legally available to their customers around the world. There is no question that YouTube and Google are continuing to take the fruit of our efforts without permission and destroying enormous value in the process. This is value that rightfully belongs to the writers, directors and talent who create it and companies like Viacom that have invested to make possible this innovation and creativity. After a great deal of unproductive negotiation, and remedial efforts by ourselves and other copyright holders, YouTube continues in its unlawful business model. Therefore, we must turn to the courts to prevent Google and YouTube from continuing to steal value from artists and to obtain compensation for the significant damage they have caused." About Viacom Viacom is a leading global entertainment content company, with prominent and respected brands. Engaging its audiences through television, motion pictures and digital platforms, Viacom seeks to reach its audiences however they consume content. Viacom's leading brands include the multiplatform properties of MTV Networks, including MTV: Music Television, VH1, CMT: Country Music Television, Logo, Nickelodeon, Nick at Nite, COMEDY CENTRAL, Spike TV, TV Land, and more than 130 networks around the world, as well as digital assets such as MTV.com, comedycentral.com, VSPOT, TurboNick, Neopets, Xfire and iFilm; BET Networks; Paramount Pictures; DreamWorks; and Famous Music. More information about Viacom and its businesses is available at www.viacom.com. LINK IMO it was only a matter of time before one of the major media companies did it, I guess the others will see how this one plays out before they take action.. I guess the you tube sellers have even more reasons to be thankful now..
this is just sore grapes from viacom. if they had it their way they would make us eat dirt. why didnt they sue for 1 zillion??
Funny. Before google bought them, youtube did not have much money and *surprise* absolutely no material to sue over. Now that google, with almost 140 billion in market capital buys them, suddenly youtube is chock full of cpoyright-infringement. I am so shocked. Nevermind the irony in viacom stating that youtube ""built a lucrative business out of exploiting the devotion of fans to others' creative works in order to enrich itself and its corporate parent Google." That's so much pot-kettle that my head spins.
Didn't the NBA just make some sort of deal with Youtube? Seems like the media companies that try to fight the internet/technology should find ways to work with it.
A lot of this springs from why Napster did so well (IMO): People really want access to this material, and at a fair price. Yes, free is not fair to the industry, but all they need to do is make it available. Look at the gigantic TV streaming boom. Most major shows are streamed on network sites now. DVD sales for TV have exploded in the 5 years they've been around. iTunes is doing the right thing, making available music videos and TV shows for $2. Viacom's on there, but they need to fully open things up. Besides, didn't utube and google introduce the digital fingerprinting to filter copyrighted material? Viacom needs to quit acting like Metallica and adjust to the changing times. Look at those 160,000 unauthorized clips and try to see at as a potential market as opposed to piracy. Evan
Hmmm... we're a company that makes a product that MILLIONS of people are clamoring for online. Wait, I have an idea! Let's sue the outlet distributing our product (at no cost to us, might I add) so that people will lose interest in our product and we'll cut off any connection with the online community entirely. Why haven't these huge corporations realized that suing to get your product off the internet is NEVER a good idea? You just end up looking like a greedy b*stard while people get your product for free somewhere else. Hey Viacom, here's an idea: why don't you distribute your product though YouTube with an embedded ad or two. Viewers get their online shows, you make money, YouTube makes money, the sponsors make money: everybody happy.
The important question is... Is this going to affect my ability to watch the Flea Market Rap 50 times a day?
google should just buy viacom. then fire the people responsible for bringing this suit as a warning to other potential litigatees.
Just like the RIAA should have bought Napster when it was offered. If the RIAA would have bought Napster and created a marketplace then and there things would be alot different now.
I'm with viacom here. If networks have to pay millions if not billions for content, why should youtube and google get it for free. Its not like Google isn't making money from it. They get billions in advertising dollars for content they don't even create or pay for. This is different the RIAA and music sharing. RIAA is going after consumers who aren't making money at it. This is like if Apple wasn't paying the record companies for the music on itunes but somehow got to keep all the money they charge. How fair is that?
But it'd be so much easier and end up creating a whole new revenue stream if companies would learn to work with these new technologies. Why not, instead of suing, create a Viacomm channel like the NBA did.
Who are we to know what would be more profitable or beneficial for Viacom? Maybe they tried and didn't get a deal to their liking. Maybe they want more control of their own content. It's odd that some people say these companies are greedy, money-centered entities and then at the same time others suggest that they are not maximizing their market or not making the most money possible, both different ways of criticizing Viacom.
youtube doesn't make us pay to watch their videos, while itunes makes us pay to listen to their music.
I would imagine if they did actually try to create a deal something would have been heard about it...instead the story would read "Viacom sues Google for 1 Billion after contract talks fall through." In any case, my point is every time some new mass media sharing technology pops up companies always seems quick to sue and cry foul, rather than exploit that new medium for their own gain. Obviously it's not black and white, google and youtube are making money off other peoples content and entitities like Viacomm want a piece of that. But I just think it would be far more benifical to work together instead of fighting. And I was pleasantly surpised that the NBA did just that by creating their own channel on YouTube.
Nor does Viacom. Both make their money off of advertising. But YouTube makes it by stealing other people's content and putting their own advertising on it.
i don't know all of the facts, but did google/youtube put the videos on there or did users do it? certainly if youtube put it on there, then they are responsible.
